She couldn't have possibly been more specific. She specifically stated it had nothing to do with referencing pop culture and was about using the entry from Wikipedia without attributing it (as my thread title indicates).

She suggests Rand Paul (and I guess by extension perhaps you) possibly does not understand what plagarism is.

Here is the piece where she goes speech by speech with the Wikipedia text below his speech.

As she explained, this is about "using the words of someone else as your own and not attributing them". It's not the worst offense in the world. But it is reminiscent of the battles with tea partiers in this forum who seem allergic to ever admitting they have made a mistake and would rather contort logic and make preposterous claims than admit wrongdoing. He should just admit it and move on.

Admit what? That Rachel Maddow is a petty propaganda peddler?

I couldn't care less where Rand Paul's speech writer finds inspiration. There are actual, you know, issues happening out in the real world. Speech crafting isn't one of them.

__________________
Ehyeh asher ehyeh.

"You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream – the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order – or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism." -Ronald Reagan